Search for: "BROWN v. GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA"
Results 281 - 300
of 321
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Aug 2008, 1:23 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Thinktank Global week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included: DRM for streaming music dies a quiet death: (Electronic Frontier Foundation), (Techdirt) CAFC decides Apotex and Impax infringed AstraZeneca’s Prilosec patents: (Law360), (Patent Prospector), (Patent Docs), (GenericsWeb), CAFC upholds lower court’s decision finding USPTO was within its rights to subject a Cooper patent to… [read post]
1 Aug 2011, 1:49 pm
It was enacted in 32 United States jurisdictions: Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, U.S. [read post]
31 May 2018, 11:13 am
Many of the other attorneys in this figure are well known to the court, yet several of the state government attorneys, including Loren AliKhan for the District of Columbia, David Franklin for Illinois and Matthew McGuire for Virginia, each argued their first cases before the court this term. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 4:02 pm
New South Wales District Court Judge Judith Gibson argues the case for reform in a paper she delivered on 29 November 2010 to the Intellectual Property, Media and Communications Law Roundtable held at UTS. [read post]
26 May 2016, 6:00 am
Legislation is being considered in 27 states and the District of Columbia. [read post]
1 Apr 2011, 8:03 am
Civil Action No. 09-1931 (RMU), No. 12., 13 United States District Court, District of Columbia. [read post]
16 May 2023, 11:43 am
This does not mean there cannot be other restrictions on voting, but the government must justify them under section 1: see, for example, Fitzgerald v. [read post]
26 Jan 2022, 9:46 am
Van Orden v. [read post]
16 Jun 2020, 5:14 am
” Indeed, prior to Little Rock, Eisenhower had been reluctant to lend federal muscle to desegregation efforts in the South in the years following the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. [read post]
13 Nov 2010, 5:01 am
For additional guidance on the reverse contingency fee, see District of Columbia Bar Ethics Committee Op. 347 (2009) (finding that reverse contingency fee is not prohibited; dissent would require a written explanation of how the lawyer and client estimate the client's exposure, but majority required only an oral explanation); Jim O. [read post]
28 Nov 2007, 7:08 am
Center Great Plains Disability and Business Technical Assistance Center University of Missouri/Columbia 100 Corporate Lake Drive Columbia, MO 65203 Phone: (573) 882-3600 (V/TTY); (800) 949-4232 (V/TTY/Toll Free) E-mail: ada@missouri.edu Web: http://www.adaproject.org ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY Technology-Related Assistance Missouri Assistive Technology 4731 South Cochise, Suite 114 Independence, MO 64055-6975 Phone: (816) 373-5193; (800) 647-8557(Toll Free) Fax:… [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 9:54 am
Click Here US District Court Decision in US v. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 10:04 am
Click Here US District Court Decision in US v. [read post]
3 May 2010, 9:30 pm
– John Fllesher, The Associated Press, April 23, 2010 A federal bankruptcy judge approved a deal with the government on Friday that requires Lyondell Chemical Co. to pay $103 million toward the cleanup of a polluted 80-mile section of the Kalamazoo River in southwest Michigan. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 7:01 am
Research indicates that the decision in Shamil Bank v. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 7:01 am
Research indicates that the decision in Shamil Bank v. [read post]
16 Nov 2021, 12:00 am
Including all 50 of the largest police departments in the country and state law enforcement agencies in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. [read post]
7 Sep 2010, 9:24 am
Click Here DECISIONS Arkema, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Dec 2022, 9:05 pm
JUNE The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, overturned Roe v. [read post]
20 Sep 2019, 8:00 am
There have been divergent applications of the theory in the same case, as exemplified by Justice Antonin Scalia’s majority opinion and Justice John Paul Stevens’ dissent in District of Columbia v. [read post]
